LG becomes the third major company to own webOS, will use it in Smart TVs.

Share this story

CNET reports electronics giant LG will acquire webOS from HP to use it for its smart televisions division. But there are no plans for webOS to be integrated into any mobile devices, as LG already has a thriving mobile division with its handsets and Android smartphones.

"It creates a new path for LG to offer an intuitive user experience and Internet services across a range of consumer electronics devices," said Skott Ahn, president and chief technology officer of LG Electronics Inc., as reported by CNET. The deal would give LG the rights to all of the source code for webOS, its documentation and engineers, and all of the related websites, as well as HP’s licenses for use with webOS products and all of the patents HP inherited from Palm. However, HP will hold on to the webOS cloud services division, which includes the app catalog and the backend services that interact with the operating system.

This will be the third major company webOS has fallen under. Its first company, Palm, was bought out by HP for $1.2 billion. Then HP called it quits in August 2011 by discontinuing all webOS-related operations, including the HP TouchPad. The company said back then that it would "continue to explore options to optimize the value of webOS software going forward."

The webOS team will stay put in both the Silicon Valley and San Francisco offices, and the company has said it would continue to support existing Palm users. What’s still unclear is what will happen to projects like Open webOS. While many peg webOS as a left-for-dead operating system, it lives on with enthusiasts—some of whom have even worked to port over the mobile operating system to compatible Android devices. We've reached out to HP, LG, and Open webOS for comment. We'll report back as soon as we can.

Speaking for myself, I find the user interface to be an arcane maze that navigating is akin to unlocking cheat modes. To see what I mean, view information of a movie, navigate to the cast, and then find some way to navigate back down to "ok". It will require some arcane dance with the arrow keys to get it back there.

Or just pause a movie and then try to get it back to the foreground without having to stop it... by pressing "x". XBMC is not designed for the uninitiated.

I just don't see the point of LG doing this. What does WebOS offer in the TV space that can't be done with a normal Linux or Android installation? Enyo is already open source and everywhere and I can't see how the WebOS interface(The best part really) translates to TV.

Speaking for myself, I find the user interface to be an arcane maze that navigating is akin to unlocking cheat modes. To see what I mean, view information of a movie, navigate to the cast, and then find some way to navigate back down to "ok". It will require some arcane dance with the arrow keys to get it back there.

Or just pause a movie and then try to get it back to the foreground without having to stop it... by pressing "x". XBMC is not designed for the uninitiated.

What version of XBMC are you using? v.12 (Frodo) has a "Fullscreen" menu option to come out of overlaid menus. It's on the right of the playback control bar when you're watching video or music, or on the left sliding pane (press Left Arrow) when you're on the other menus.

XBMC is designed so that everything you can do is accessible with 4 arrow keys, Enter, and Back. If you don't like the menus, use the shortcuts. Also, use the Wiki.

Ugh...this is sad. No offense to LG and smart TVs, but I thought WebOS was a really good mobile OS (boot times aside) and I'm disappointed it's now been relegated to a TV interface. I'll hold out hope that LG will actually give the WebOS biz some TLC and maybe do something compelling with the software.

This "smart" TV gimmick needs to die, TVs should be plain output devices, period. Anything they do is always served better by appliances connected to it. TV manufacturers should spend their R&D time making their TVs better at what's really needed but always neglected: reducing input lag.

This "smart" TV gimmick needs to die, TVs should be plain output devices, period. Anything they do is always served better by appliances connected to it. TV manufacturers should spend their R&D time making their TVs better at what's really needed but always neglected: reducing input lag.

Actually I've thought that TVs could do a better job of communicating their internal state to those appliances.

I don't know about the rest of you, but when I shop for a TV, I look at screen resolution, source inputs, supported PC resolutions, color quality, and refresh rates. Software never even enters the equation, but now I suppose it has to. I'd prefer to avoid it altogether if possible.

I can see the value in having a minimal OS and apps like Netflix, web browsers, etc on a TV for people who don't already have computers, consoles, and set top boxes in their living rooms, but I sincerely hope that the availability of dumb monitors does not significantly decrease for those of us that do.

This "smart" TV gimmick needs to die, TVs should be plain output devices, period. Anything they do is always served better by appliances connected to it. TV manufacturers should spend their R&D time making their TVs better at what's really needed but always neglected: reducing input lag.

At first I was excited that my new TV was a "smart TV", meaning I wouldn't need a second peripheral to stream Netflix. And it does work pretty well. However I quickly realize the limitations when it became apparent that TV manufacturers have no business developing software, how each model basically gets it's own custom OS, and your model becomes abandoned in terms of software updates almost immediately.

This "smart" TV gimmick needs to die, TVs should be plain output devices, period. Anything they do is always served better by appliances connected to it. TV manufacturers should spend their R&D time making their TVs better at what's really needed but always neglected: reducing input lag.

At first I was excited that my new TV was a "smart TV", meaning I wouldn't need a second peripheral to stream Netflix. And it does work pretty well. However I quickly realize the limitations when it became apparent that TV manufacturers have no business developing software, how each model basically gets it's own custom OS, and your model becomes abandoned in terms of software updates almost immediately.

I couldn't agree more. They need to be focusing on better image processors, better communication with existing devices, thinner, lighter, more energy efficient displays, and broader support for standardized input resolutions.

I just don't see the point of LG doing this. What does WebOS offer in the TV space that can't be done with a normal Linux or Android installation? Enyo is already open source and everywhere and I can't see how the WebOS interface(The best part really) translates to TV.

They aren't dependent on google and web os doesn't have the same issues with ms patent coverage as android

I just don't see the point of LG doing this. What does WebOS offer in the TV space that can't be done with a normal Linux or Android installation? Enyo is already open source and everywhere and I can't see how the WebOS interface(The best part really) translates to TV.

They aren't dependent on google and web os doesn't have the same issues with ms patent coverage as android

I would assume it does...Aren't most devices that have shipped with it FAT32 compatible to say the least?

Please don't. My TV needs to be a large monitor with 4 HDMI ports and integrated power supply. That's all I want. (Add a digital tuner and integrated speakers if you want to, because a lot of folks need them, but that's it.)

I always wanted webOS and LG to get together, since it was clear that Palm couldn't make it on its own. After all LG was the one company who beat Apple to market with a mobile that used a capacitive screen as the primary means of navigation and one of the very few companies that stayed with their own design line after Apple made rounded corners the industry standard. The same was the case for webOS, daring to try new solutions for a better than Apple usability.

Too bad webOS seemingly is set to play the role of a smart tv platform instead of a platform that is found on every smart device in the home, naturally starting with smartphones. Still we can hope that ubunto and firefox shows that there is a good reason to give webOS another try.(read that as you want)

Speaking for myself, I find the user interface to be an arcane maze that navigating is akin to unlocking cheat modes. To see what I mean, view information of a movie, navigate to the cast, and then find some way to navigate back down to "ok". It will require some arcane dance with the arrow keys to get it back there.

Or just pause a movie and then try to get it back to the foreground without having to stop it... by pressing "x". XBMC is not designed for the uninitiated.

What version of XBMC are you using? v.12 (Frodo) has a "Fullscreen" menu option to come out of overlaid menus. It's on the right of the playback control bar when you're watching video or music, or on the left sliding pane (press Left Arrow) when you're on the other menus.

XBMC is designed so that everything you can do is accessible with 4 arrow keys, Enter, and Back. If you don't like the menus, use the shortcuts. Also, use the Wiki.

Speaking for myself, I find the user interface to be an arcane maze that navigating is akin to unlocking cheat modes. To see what I mean, view information of a movie, navigate to the cast, and then find some way to navigate back down to "ok". It will require some arcane dance with the arrow keys to get it back there.

Or just pause a movie and then try to get it back to the foreground without having to stop it... by pressing "x". XBMC is not designed for the uninitiated.

What version of XBMC are you using? v.12 (Frodo) has a "Fullscreen" menu option to come out of overlaid menus. It's on the right of the playback control bar when you're watching video or music, or on the left sliding pane (press Left Arrow) when you're on the other menus.

XBMC is designed so that everything you can do is accessible with 4 arrow keys, Enter, and Back. If you don't like the menus, use the shortcuts. Also, use the Wiki.

If a UI requires me to go to a wiki, the UI devs have failed.

This.

I realized that XBMC wasn´t for me when I tried to get it running on an otherwise stellar-working Ubuntu 10.04 installation on my laptop. Having grown used to Window Media Center and it´s mostly no-nonsense UI, I was dismayed to be unable to even *find* the "Scan for DVB-T TV channels" button (I have to assume ther was/is none).

Speaking for myself, I find the user interface to be an arcane maze that navigating is akin to unlocking cheat modes. To see what I mean, view information of a movie, navigate to the cast, and then find some way to navigate back down to "ok". It will require some arcane dance with the arrow keys to get it back there.

Or just pause a movie and then try to get it back to the foreground without having to stop it... by pressing "x". XBMC is not designed for the uninitiated.

What version of XBMC are you using? v.12 (Frodo) has a "Fullscreen" menu option to come out of overlaid menus. It's on the right of the playback control bar when you're watching video or music, or on the left sliding pane (press Left Arrow) when you're on the other menus.

XBMC is designed so that everything you can do is accessible with 4 arrow keys, Enter, and Back. If you don't like the menus, use the shortcuts. Also, use the Wiki.

If a UI requires me to go to a wiki, the UI devs have failed.

This.

I realized that XBMC wasn´t for me when I tried to get it running on an otherwise stellar-working Ubuntu 10.04 installation on my laptop. Having grown used to Window Media Center and it´s mostly no-nonsense UI, I was dismayed to be unable to even *find* the "Scan for DVB-T TV channels" button (I have to assume ther was/is none).

MeTV and Kaffeine gave XBMC a run for its money in this regard.

xbmc is being nazi in their interface choices. Any app that won't let me navigate my files *by folders*, but instead insists on reorganizing my stuff into whatever baldy-designed and badly-implemented and buggy structure their coke-addled devs think is best for me, deserves a good spanking.

Please don't. My TV needs to be a large monitor with 4 HDMI ports and integrated power supply. That's all I want. (Add a digital tuner and integrated speakers if you want to, because a lot of folks need them, but that's it.)

And for people who want more in a TV?

The fact is that you don't have to use the "Smart TV" features, I have an LG with all of that non-sense, and a Wii-like wand controller, I just don't use any of it. But for some people (esepcially those who don't have have consoles or set-top boxes for things like Netflix), they could compelling features.

Please don't. My TV needs to be a large monitor with 4 HDMI ports and integrated power supply. That's all I want. (Add a digital tuner and integrated speakers if you want to, because a lot of folks need them, but that's it.)

And for people who want more in a TV?

The fact is that you don't have to use the "Smart TV" features, I have an LG with all of that non-sense, and a Wii-like wand controller, I just don't use any of it. But for some people (esepcially those who don't have have consoles or set-top boxes for things like Netflix), they could compelling features.

Security. Just because you aren't using those features in your TV, doesn't mean someone in Beijing isn't.

Price. Nothing is free. By adding these features to the TV, manufacturers have to charge more for it, and you pay more when you buy the TV whether you use those features or not.

The fact is that you don't have to use the "Smart TV" features, I have an LG with all of that non-sense, and a Wii-like wand controller, I just don't use any of it. But for some people (esepcially those who don't have have consoles or set-top boxes for things like Netflix), they could compelling features.

People who want more should buy the devices and hook them up, so that people who *don't* want them won't have to pay for them. That's what components are all about: deciding what you want, and then adding it all together. Yes, you don't have to use the smart features, but it isn't good that you have to also *pay* for them!

I've never used WebOS (wasn't fast enough to grab a $99 Touchpad), but I've heard good things about it and wish it well with the new platform.

No matter which OS manufacturers put on their TVs though, for me the highest priorities will always be standards and interoperability. I don't care how well your TV works with your washing machine, I want it to work with the generic PC and the smartphone by your competitors as well.

Price. Nothing is free. By adding these features to the TV, manufacturers have to charge more for it, and you pay more when you buy the TV whether you use those features or not.

Average price for a 24" TV is way down compared with 2003 and the major features are not even comparable to TVs near a similar price point 10 years ago. Demand drives price, not features. When every TV is a "Smart TV" then you will pay the same low price that you do today, if not lower.

Security... yeah that could still be a concern, but if you're are being targeted by China then your TV is the least of your worries.

I too think it could be a grab for some patents that would likely help LG's smart phone business defensively.

I find this relatively pointless. WebOS only really shines when used as a touch interface, which it truly excels at IMO with things like their card-based multitasking to their implementation of e-mail and a variety of other minor items.

I have a Touchpad running CM9 and it's great, but on the rare occasion that I boot into WebOS I remember how intuitive it is to use and what a waste of a great OS.

All LG will get with this purchase are some pretty icons and a patent portfolio they can use to lean on other manufacturers if they edge into their UI arena.

As with other posters, I wish them well... but I really do wonder how well an interface designed for the palm of you hand is going to translate to 10'+ across the room. I suppose working that out will be among their first tasks.

Bless them for not using Google's free spyware platform. It bids well for LG. WebOS is a true innovation that proves you don't have to desperately copy and in this Xerox haste then realize you didn't have hardware acceleration implemented until version 4.X.

Speaking for myself, I find the user interface to be an arcane maze that navigating is akin to unlocking cheat modes. To see what I mean, view information of a movie, navigate to the cast, and then find some way to navigate back down to "ok". It will require some arcane dance with the arrow keys to get it back there.

Or just pause a movie and then try to get it back to the foreground without having to stop it... by pressing "x". XBMC is not designed for the uninitiated.

What version of XBMC are you using? v.12 (Frodo) has a "Fullscreen" menu option to come out of overlaid menus. It's on the right of the playback control bar when you're watching video or music, or on the left sliding pane (press Left Arrow) when you're on the other menus.

XBMC is designed so that everything you can do is accessible with 4 arrow keys, Enter, and Back. If you don't like the menus, use the shortcuts. Also, use the Wiki.

If a UI requires me to go to a wiki, the UI devs have failed.

This.

I realized that XBMC wasn´t for me when I tried to get it running on an otherwise stellar-working Ubuntu 10.04 installation on my laptop. Having grown used to Window Media Center and it´s mostly no-nonsense UI, I was dismayed to be unable to even *find* the "Scan for DVB-T TV channels" button (I have to assume ther was/is none).

MeTV and Kaffeine gave XBMC a run for its money in this regard.

xbmc is being nazi in their interface choices. Any app that won't let me navigate my files *by folders*, but instead insists on reorganizing my stuff into whatever baldy-designed and badly-implemented and buggy structure their coke-addled devs think is best for me, deserves a good spanking.

XBMC has both options: you can navigate your folder hierarchies under "Videos", or you can say "this folder has movies" and XBMC scrapes information and builds a library with a prettified interface under "Movies". You might have to go into Settings (oh dear...) and activate those options (oh bother...) like you have to activate DVB-T support ("why do I have to tell it what I want?")

About the Wiki: how did you learn that the keyboard shortcut to stop was "x"?

I think they are more interested in the patent portfolio and engineeres that developed webOS. Thats the real prize. PALM had a lot of patents in handhelds that LG can use to defend itself against Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc. Those patents cover a lot of Wifi/cell, touch, and email type of communications and such.

The engineers of webOS are underated in my opinion. webOS was really cool. It wasnt the engineers fault that PALM/HP managers and senior management royally screwed it up.

I never liked their "Lucky Goldstar" monitors but I do like their TVs and phones.

Good luck Lucky Goldstar, hope you give webOS a run for its money unlike HP.

This "smart" TV gimmick needs to die, TVs should be plain output devices, period. Anything they do is always served better by appliances connected to it. TV manufacturers should spend their R&D time making their TVs better at what's really needed but always neglected: reducing input lag.

At first I was excited that my new TV was a "smart TV", meaning I wouldn't need a second peripheral to stream Netflix. And it does work pretty well. However I quickly realize the limitations when it became apparent that TV manufacturers have no business developing software, how each model basically gets it's own custom OS, and your model becomes abandoned in terms of software updates almost immediately.

I think the issue could be fixed if manufacturers left the software up to companies like Microsoft, Google, or even Apple (though I'm not sure if Apple would want to be involved with hardware that wasn't their own). I really, really, really hate the mentality that a lot of hardware manufacturers have towards Windows and Android though ("hey, lets see who can write the crappiest software to redo basic operating system functionality that works great as is!"). I don't care about differentiation in user interface between two PC brands with Windows (I just want to use Windows!) or two smart phone brands with Android (I just want to use Android!) - differentiate in hardware!

Please don't. My TV needs to be a large monitor with 4 HDMI ports and integrated power supply. That's all I want. (Add a digital tuner and integrated speakers if you want to, because a lot of folks need them, but that's it.)

And for people who want more in a TV?

The fact is that you don't have to use the "Smart TV" features, I have an LG with all of that non-sense, and a Wii-like wand controller, I just don't use any of it. But for some people (esepcially those who don't have have consoles or set-top boxes for things like Netflix), they could compelling features.

Security. Just because you aren't using those features in your TV, doesn't mean someone in Beijing isn't.

Wait, someone in Beijing has managed to penetrate my Cisco ASA and to specifically attack my SmartTV? Forget any other device on my network...

Maybe I should also unplug my receiver which has internet connectivity, and my consoles, and then unplug my computers too?

Paranoid much? Most people don't allow unfettered or unsolicited traffic to the smarttv, so the only way that an exploit could be attacked would be if you were to use something like the built-in browser and visited a malicious site. If you don't use the features, then they cannot attack them.

Quote:

Price. Nothing is free. By adding these features to the TV, manufacturers have to charge more for it, and you pay more when you buy the TV whether you use those features or not.

I bought my LG TV with smart features and 3D because it was cheaper than a similarly sized Samsung or Sony which didn't have any of those features. My TV has much less power than a Raspberry PI device which costs $25... so no, hardware wise it doesn't cost a fortune, not even close, especially not at the volume which they produce their machines.

The fact is that the price is determined based on what the open market will support. If they add smart tv features and the price goes up and people don't care for the features, they simply won't sell (and there will be non-smart TVs for the "value" segment).

So the argument of "don't do it or anyone" because I don't want it on MY tv still doesn't make any sense... you can buy a different TV or opt not to use those features.

The fact is that you don't have to use the "Smart TV" features, I have an LG with all of that non-sense, and a Wii-like wand controller, I just don't use any of it. But for some people (esepcially those who don't have have consoles or set-top boxes for things like Netflix), they could compelling features.

People who want more should buy the devices and hook them up, so that people who *don't* want them won't have to pay for them. That's what components are all about: deciding what you want, and then adding it all together. Yes, you don't have to use the smart features, but it isn't good that you have to also *pay* for them!

And you're the one who's deciding what people should or should not have to buy and hook-up to their TVs? Here's an idea: maybe they could decide for themselves and opt NOT to buy a smartTV if they don't want one...because last I checked there are a hell of a lot of non-smartTVs.

Also the actual cost of the smart features is negligible. A manufacturer might charge a premium for them, but if the market doesn't support it (i.e. doesn't provide enough value to justify the price), they'll either drop in price or simply go away.

If at some point every TV has smart features, that doesn't mean that the price would increase any either. A 55" LED TV (smart or not) is a LOT cheaper now than a 46" LCD TV used to be 3-4 years ago. $25 Raspberry PI board has more power and functionality than any SmartTV on the market (and they don't enjoy the economies of scale that a LG would get from producing millions of units)... at one point you paid a premium of a 120Hz TV, now that's pretty-much common place.